AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02159
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
IN THE MATTER OF:
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge has been held against him in the workplace and has
kept him from obtaining gainful employment. He previously
worked overseas; however, he was denied employment by another
contractor due to his general discharge.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of an
electronic communiqué from a potential employer.
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 7 Jan 1981, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.
On 16 May 1984, his commander notified him he was recommending
he be discharged for “Unsatisfactory Performance and Minor
Disciplinary Infractions.” The authority for this action was
AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airman. The specific
reasons for this action were:
for unauthorized entry into an alarmed area.
checks.
disregarding established dormitory policies and procedures.
having a verbal confrontation with a co-worker.
On 16 Sep 1983, he received a letter LOC for writing bad
On 5 Mar 1984, he received a letter of reprimand for
On 20 Jul 1983, he received a letter of counseling (LOC)
On 5 Mar 1984, he received a letter of reprimand (LOR) for
On 12 Mar 1984, he received a LOR for writing bad checks.
2
On 14 Mar 1984, he received a LOR for failing to keep a
legal appointment.
On 16 May 1984, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the
discharge notification.
On 6 Jun 1984, the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge
legally sufficient and on 8 Jun 1984, the discharge authority
approved his discharge.
On 11 Jun 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force,
with a general discharge. His narrative reason for separation
was “Unsatisfactory Performance Misconduct-Pattern of Minor
Disciplinary Infractions.” He served three years, five months,
and five days of total active service.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of
investigation, Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the
data furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record
(Exhibit C).
18 Sep Aug 2012, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit D), as of this date, no response has been received by
this office.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice
that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority.
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or
disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on
clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is
sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought
on that basis. However, should he provide documentation
pertaining to his post-service accomplishments and activities,
we would be willing to reconsider his request. Therefore, in
2
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon
which to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered
with this application.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application
in Executive Session on 7 Nov 2012, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-02159:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Apr 2012, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 20 Jun 2012.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, 18 Sep 2012.
Panel Chair
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03705
After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that the actions taken against him were improper, contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time, or based on factors other than his own misconduct. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2002-03705 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00053
_______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request for removal of the contested FAs. The applicant has failed to provide any information from the rating officials on the contested report. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00053 in Executive Session on 30 Jan 2014, under the provisions of AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01888
c. On 3 October 1983, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for failure to report. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the reasons that were stated for his discharge are not accurate. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2004-01888 in Executive Session on 21 October 2004, under...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02409
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02409 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors in her discharge processing. We see no evidence of an error in this case and...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02933
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02933 INDEX CODE: 131.02, 111.01, 111.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 Mar 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Referral Officer Performance Report (OPR) for the period ending 21 Mar 05, a 6 Jul 05 Letter of Reprimand (LOR), two Letters of Counseling (LOCs) dated 7 and 8...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01692
On 3 Dec 87, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) considered a request from the applicant to upgrade his discharge to Honorable. Exhibit C. FBI Record. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Aug 12.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02441
On 16 January 1985, the applicant received a letter of counseling (LOC) for being late for duty on 15 January 1986. k. The applicant received verbal counseling on 24 January 1985 for a dishonored check. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D). While the applicant contends that he was discharged because he was deemed unfit psychologically, it appears that the discharge was based on the applicant’s overall misconduct,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02205
As for his separation date, he was not supposed to separate until after 23 Jul 04. The law provides for benefits for an individual who separates with less than a full term of service if the reason for discharge is Secretarial Authority, hardship, service-connected disability, disability existing prior to service (EPTS), physical or mental condition that interferes with duty, or reduction in force (RIF). While his separation date may have been beyond his control, we are persuaded he...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00306
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00306 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 JUN 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. f. On 6 August 1981, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC), for being delinquent to the NCO...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05071
The Letter of Counseling (LOC), dated 7 Sep 10; LOC, dated 18 Feb 11; Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 28 Mar 11; LOC, dated 28 Mar 11; and LOC, dated 15 Jun 11 be removed from her official military personnel records. FINDING (As amended by AFGSC/IG): NOT SUBSTANTIATED The applicants commander removed the 18 Feb 11 LOR from the applicants military personnel records as a result of the substantiated finding of reprisal in the AFGSC/IG Report. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is...